Hodges v. Black
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court. No action can be maintained at law by one partner against his copartner on account of the partnership concerns until a final settlement has been reached and a balance struck between them. — Stothert v. Knox, 5 Mo. 112 ; Springer v. Cabell, 10 Mo. 640 ; McKnightv.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court. No action can be maintained at law by one partner against his copartner on account of the partnership concerns until a final settlement has been reached and a balance struck between them. — Stothert v. Knox, 5 Mo. 112 ; Springer v. Cabell, 10 Mo. 640 ; McKnightv. McCutchen, 27 Mo. 436; Smith v. Smith, 33 Mo. 557 ; Scott v. Caruth, 50 Mo. 120 ; Bond v. Bemis, 55 Mo. 524; Leabo v. Renshaw, 61 Mo. 292 ; Ives v. Miller, 19 Barb. 196 ; Richardson v. Banle, 4 Myl. & Cr. 165 ; Stoddard v. Wood, 9 Gray, 90; Story on Part., sect. 219. “The balance against every…
1Opinion of the CourtBakewell, J.
This is an action by the indorsee against the maker of two negotiable promissory notes, alleged to have been acquired by plaintiff before maturity for value.
The answer is a general denial, and sets up further, as a special defence, that in March, 1873, defendant (Black) and one Aspell were partners in business in New York, each equally interested ; that the partnership was then dissolved, the firm being insolvent, and leaving no assets ; that Aspell and Black then made a temporary casting up of the affairs of the firm, computing its indebtedness at $4,311; that this was an error, various…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Terry v. HickmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1876
3Cited by10 opinions
- Fitzgerald v. BarkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Loewen v. ForseeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Conrad v. FisherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Napa Valley Wine Co. v. RinehartMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- Ridgeway v. HerbertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.